Tarasoff++v.+Regents+of+University+of+California

Case #5 Sanareena Keller

Supreme Court of California

 * Decided 1976**


 * Background:** Prosenjit Poddar murdered Tatiana Tarasoff a few months after confiding to his threapist, Dr. Lawrance Moore at Cowell Memorial Hospital, of the University of California, of his intentions to do so. Dr. Moore alerted campus police, which detained him breifly, but relased him after deeming him rational. Tarasoff's parents brought suit against four psychiatrists and the campus police for failure to warn their daughter or them of the threat.


 * Decision/Rationale:** The California Supreme Court held that a physician must use "reasonable care" to prevent a patient form harming themselves or others. The court held that the doctors did not exercise "reasonable care" to ensure the safety of Tarasoff in relation to their patient, and were therefore deemed responsible. However, in the case of the campus police, state statute relieve public employees from liablity of injury that occurs as a result of them exercising duties according to established policies. Therefore, the campus police was immuned form suit.


 * Impact on Education:** It is therefore necessary that educators know and understand the policies for reporting any information that we might be privy to. If in doubt, then shout. As public employees working with minors it becomes our responsiblity to ensure a safe environment for all our students.

a) City police took over the case after 24 hours b) State statute relieve public employees from liability of injury c) Tarasoff's parents did not have the right to bring suit bacause the threat was not against them d) They did not know Tarasoff, so they could not have warned her
 * Quiz Question:** Campus police was immuned from suit because: